User talk:Andranikpasha/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] ASALA

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Please consider joining WikiProject Armenia. I reverted your edit on ASALA article, because ASALA stoped operating in 1986. Any attacks claimed after that are unverifiable and can not be included in the article. --VartanM 18:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

-OK. but why you deleted all other changes too?

Barev; Du inch gidas Urartu mesen?. --Vonones 00:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Lol Vonones, Դու ինչ գիտես Ուրարտուի մասին? VartanM 02:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

A lot of:) Shat aghbyurner unem haykakan Urartui yev hay patmakan urish khntirneri veraberyal. Urartui masin karogh em ruseren medz nyut ugharkel (author is me), kam el karogh em portsel angleren targmanel. Yete konkret hartsum dzez aghbyurner en petk (sources), indz grek, kportsem ognel. Best wishes, User:Andranikpasha 11:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Lav ah aper, email unes? --Vonones 08:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Unem ahper! Seghmir "E-mail this user".--User:Andranikpasha 14:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Chi agnmem asumeh. "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." --Vonones 10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Pls try again. "E-mail this user"-n arten ashkhatum e..--User:Andranikpasha 23:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Not yet, you have to put your email, than check " Enable e-mail from other users" on the bottom. --Vonones 12:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

kneres ahper arden ughghetsi. Yete eli chi srtacvi, imats tur, e-mails estegh kgrem!Andranikpasha 15:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Agev :) --Vonones 15:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Shushimassacre.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Shushimassacre.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No problem!

Anytime. Btw I think we should move Medzn Mourad to Hampartsoum Boyadjian since that is his real name and it is quite commonly used. - Fedayee 23:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Youre right! I also think about it. In Armenian Medzn Mourad form is very popular but in English "Hampartsum Poyajian" is commonly used. So Ill change it! Thanks again!: Andranikpasha 12:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome 2

Great job so far, Andranikpasha, but please be careful with quotations, it might be better to rephrase them in many situations. Also, I personally dislike seeing blockquotes, possibly b/c of abusive usage of them here on Wikipedia, especially on the 'shaky ground' articles. I would appreciate it very much, if you could avoid them, when possible, and when it does not add much beauty. Wikipedia does not take a stance, and it is hard to not impose anything on the reader with blockquoting. Thanks. Deniz^T_C 21:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I saw it:) But anyways somtimes its better to represent what the sources are asking and this practics is commonly used in Wiki. For example "The Time" is one of the most famous and respected journals in the world and it is interesting what they are writing about the topic (especially if it happens very rarely as in the case of ASALA). Andranikpasha 22:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Khojaly Massacre

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. . Grandmaster 10:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Am I the iniciator? I have no any other purposes except that Im just tring to make that article more neutral- as I represented in the talk page that some of the text links are not reliable sources... so why you dont answer to my questions at the talk page? I hope its the better way to solve whats the better variant. Andranikpasha 11:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Pardon? - Francis Tyers · 17:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parishan

I don't need to provide sources that Azeris and Azerbaijani/Transcaucasian Tatars refer to the same ethnic group. This issue is very well covered in the Azerbaijani people article.

Also, the word Turkish, which exists in the English language, does not mean Azeri. Parishan 08:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

As I asked I dont see a big problem to change it but better if with source asking Azeris lived in Shushi (about the name of Shushi see the references, for example- Kalli Raptis) in 1920 as in that time Azerbaijanis was a new official name and we had to be more careful. By the way, we can discuss it in the article's talk page to be available for other users too.Andranikpasha 08:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The usage of a new ethnonym does not mean the creation of a new ethnic group. Inuits are not a newly-born ethnic group just because until the 1970s they were referred to as Eskimo.

I was talking about official terminology used in documents, maps, etc. published at the time. In that term, you won't find a single reference to the city as Shushi. Parishan 09:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

see the article's talk page! Andranikpasha 09:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing the tags from the article. I know you have references, but read the tag: the references don't mean that it must be removed. Parishan 10:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

see the articles talk page! provide more that 6 references (as I represented+ other quotations) asking Shusha Massacres or anything else and then add the tags, ok? Andranikpasha 10:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I alone provided 3 sources, where the Shusha events were classified as an Armenian rebellion put down by Azerbaijani forces. That is substantial enough for the neutrality tags to be there. Parishan 10:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

2 of them are not reliable- de Vaal (not neutral) and Hrono (whats this, a personal web-page, I can show you other such "sources"???). Pls lets discuss it in the articles talk page!!!!!Andranikpasha 10:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts

Hi! Id like to note the last reverts of user Francis Tyers here and here. It seems to be an edit war without any serious explanations. Please could you have a look at that reverts? Thanks in advance! Andranikpasha 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, how're you going?

I've had a look- I think all that can be done under the circumstances has been done. At the moment, the article is protected, which is what I would have done- so that all arguments can be discussed on the talk page.

Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 09:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! The only thing I suggest is to protect it in more neutral (I mean - no-partisan!) variant not in the variant which was criticized more than others! Just one example- they write in description "large number". How we can describe it? Is 300 a large number, is 600 or 6.000000. Its seems to be a very tragic pseudo-mathematics... Andranikpasha 09:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Shu1930.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Shushi1930.jpg. The copy called Image:Shushi1930.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 21:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] so lovely

Ah Andranikpasha, ah. When you are on the verge of violating 3RR, when you are making an edit war (assuming I am edit warring, I wouldn't be doing it alone), when you are possibly the only one who openly is of your opinion on the subject, instead of stooping to think why this is the case, you just warn me with that message. Thanks, very selfless deed, indeed. By the way, you reverted three times, assuming that the anon is not you. If that anon is you, you will have broken WP:3RR, and that anon can be considered a sockpuppet of yours. Not a good thing to do. You are already asked to be checked for being a sockpuppet of a (former) featured editor somewhere. Deniz^T_C 13:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, it is not unlikely that our reverter anon, User talk:69.77.169.2, is similar to User Talk:209.172.44.212, in several ways, one of them being an anonymous proxy. Deniz^T_C 13:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The result is: "Andranikpasha contacted me in an email, and after looking through the edit histories, I've come to the conclusion that he is a good-faith editor, and I will assume with good faith that he is not a sock-puppet. While he and the confirmed sock-puppet Artaxiad have edited similar subjects, I see no "tag team" editing, nor shared POV. In fact, Andranikpasha seems to make very little additions to the text (therefore not inserting POV), instead finding sources and improving formatting. Also, his "mainspace" (article) edits go right up until today,[22] where Artaxiad's stop abruptly on April 9.[23] In conclusion, I have crossed Andranikpasha off the list as it is very clear that we have a case of mistaken identity." [1]Andranikpasha 13:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2

Please remember the remedies in the above arbitration case - if you continue to edit war on any pages, you will be blocked from editing. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info but I cant understand have I rights to revert the unrelated information from the arrticle or no? For example my reverts for today. A user added previously discussed source related to Albania and Arcakh to prove something related to ...Arran and Karabakh. What must I do for a better way? PS - I didnt remember if even I deleted any relevant reliable information from an article. Is there such a fact??...Andranikpasha 10:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

What you need to do is not revert war, however much you believe something is wrong, just walk away from it. The articles you are involved in editing cause massive conflicts, hence the two arbitration cases. The latest one gives any administrator the right to block a user causing disruption in these articles post a warning, that's what the above warning is serving as. Please, just move onto something else. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Im interested in the history of Armenia, why Ill pass to edit articles about anything else. Is the user Grandmaster or Baku87 have more rights to edit them even if they broke the Wiki rules. If they think their sources are relevant why to not ask for arbitration? Andranikpasha 10:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

No-one has anymore rights than anyone else - everyone is equal. The arbitration committee have been asked previously and this is the resolution - either everyone gots on with it constructively or they get blocked. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notice of editing restrictions

Notice: Under the terms of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2, any editor who edits articles which relate to the region of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Iran and the ethnic and historical issues related to that area in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility may be placed under several editing restrictions, by notice on that editor's talk page. This notice is to inform you that based on your edits, you are hereby placed under the following restrictions:

1. Revert limitation (formerly known as revert parole). You are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism, and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
2. Supervised editing (formerly known as probation). You may be banned by any administrator from editing any or all articles which relate to the region of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Iran and the ethnic and historical issues related to that area should you fail to maintain a reasonable degree of civility in your interactions with one another concerning disputes which may arise.
3. Civility supervision (formerly known as civility parole). If you make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then you may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses.

Enforcement: Violations of limitations, supervision, or bans imposed by the remedies in this case may be enforced by brief blocks of up to a week in the event of repeat violations. After 5 blocks the maximum block period shall increase to one year.

Note: This notice is not effective unless given by an administrator and logged here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Postlethwaite (talk • contribs) 10:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

So pls show me even one unconstructively revert for me to understand where I was guilty. I read Grandmasters words that I edit the articles "in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility on revert parole and other limitations, established by the arbcom."! He added me to sockpuppets check-list and when he didnt succeed, now he wrote things without facts. I need even one fact of "an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility on revert parole and other limitations, established by the arbcom.", if its true! If it is true ok block me, if no- Id prefer to hear a sorry from he! Andranikpasha 10:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

You're agressively edit warring without discussion, that's why you have been placed on the list. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

OK! A simple fact of an aggressive revert without discussion please!Andranikpasha 11:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

You know what an edit war is, any more of it will result in a block. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

So is there a fact or no? im always keep the rules and Im correct so I dont see a reason to call my activity an editwar.Andranikpasha 11:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

? And are there a rule asking if even I didnt make any aggressive revert without discussion and didnt pass 3RR anyways my activities can be call an edit war?Andranikpasha 12:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to email

Thanks for your email. I am aware that there are many senior editors trying to find solutions to the ongoing problems with edits in the areas you are active. I have no background knowledge of the area, and it would probably not help if I were to try and get involved.-gadfium 21:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I see that you've been indefinitely blocked. If you wish to appeal against this, add {{unblock|reason why you should be unblocked}} to this talk page.-gadfium 04:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Asalagerb.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Asalagerb.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 18:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your images

Andranikpasha, I checked your images, they seem to be wrongly tagged. Also, as far as I know, we cannot have images that are even free for non-commercial use. I don't think we should be able to keep the ones that are free for say informational use. The following are the images uploaded by you:

1. Image:AndranikOzanian.jpg (instead of saying that it is also published on your geocities site, you should tell us where you got that photo. I don't think you were alive, at least not old enough to attend that event and take a photo in 1921)
2. Image:Arme80.jpg (Armen Grigoryan is a living person, a singer, so we should be able to find a free alternative)
3. Image:Asalagerb.jpg (it should be fine being a logo, but it is orphaned now, will be deleted if it stays so)
4. Image:Aznavour.jpg‎ (wrong tag again, and for informational use only. We should be able to find a free alternative)
5. Image:AznavourArm.jpg (same as above)
6. Image:Hovhshiraz.jpg (for informational and educational use only)
7. Image:Hunch20.jpg (can you prove that it is published before 1923?)
8. Image:Hunchak20.jpg (same as above)
9. Image:Knarazn.jpg‎ (wrong tag, aznavour was born in 1924, he seems to be about five years old in that picture, it is definitely not before 1923)
10. Image:Sedahoka.gif‎ (this one should be fine)
11. Image:Shu1930.jpg (wrong tag, the photo is from 30's, not before 1923, most likely not free)
12. Image:Shushimassacre.jpg (for informational purpose)

Deniz^T_C 20:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use disputed for Image:Sedahoka.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Sedahoka.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

That image is from 1887, so it almost certainly is in the public domain. El_C 04:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mentorship in effect

Hi. With the consent of the blocking admin you are hereby unblocked, subject to mentorship. All prior restrictions remain in effect. Best of luck. El_C 04:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back Andranik, remember that besides my mentorship you are also under supervised editing and are limited to 1 revert per week. Also if you edit any article in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility you may and most likely will be blocked again. VartanM 04:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to the Users and Admins who support my unblocking! Kind regards, Andranikpasha 10:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Andranik I replaced your welcome template. I think this one gives a lot more information. If you have time just go over the policies, they will help you better understand how wikipedia works --VartanM 17:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Andranikpasha 19:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Andranik I forgot to tell you, per Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 arbcom remedies you were placed under revert limitation

Revert limitation (formerly known as revert parole). You are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism, and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.

Which means you can only revert an article only once a week and you must justify your revert in the talkpage. Ie. why you reverted and how your version is better then the one before. And please read the --VartanM 16:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

About the userboxe, I'll see What I can do. VartanM 03:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!Andranikpasha 10:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barev

Barev Andranik, take a look at my comments on [2] [3]

See if I am coming across to you, cause eupator seems to be confused.--Moosh88 21:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Barev! Dzer hastseov indz namak grek, I can send you some useful sources on the topic (in Russian).Andranikpasha 22:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Aznavour.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aznavour.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VegitaU 15:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:Aznavour.jpg

[edit] Armenia Name section corrections

Can you please take a look here [4] , Moosh88 had put the right info, and Dbachmann removed it. It should say the earliest mention by Greeks , not earliest ever mentioned of Armenia, and by the way that Greek historian didnt say Armenia, in that exact form. In fact nobody in those ancient days said exactly in the form we say "Armenia" now. So, if you look in the Talk:Armenia page, you see that Dbachmmann himself had put those earlier records before the Greeks mention in their forms of our name. So those much older records are referring to the land, and same with the Persian "Armina" , referring to the "land" of Armenia. So those earlier records Armani, and Ermenen, that if you look in the Talk page, Dbachmann said we can put it, and he himself had put it, if you notice his earlier edits in the Armenia page. So all these records that are not in the "exact" Armenia <-- form, were referring to the "land", as we have earlier than 500 BC, way earlier than 500 BC. 216.175.98.253 23:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shushimassacre.jpg

Hi, could you please provide an exact source for Image:Shushimassacre.jpg. I have tagged it to be deleted in 7 days if a verifiable source has not been provided. John Vandenberg 07:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC) also Image:Shu1930.jpg needs verifiable source information. John Vandenberg 07:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Andranikpasha 20:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armenia, Subartu and Sumer

Hello Andranikpasha. I was not exactly sure what your suggestion was on my talk page, were you seeking to have the article moved to another location? If so, please post your request to Wikipedia:Requested moves. If you had something else in mind, please let me know. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, I asked for the moving of the separate part related to the book. but as I see now there is a proposal for the deletion of the whole article cuz of low notability, so maybe its better to wait a little before discussions will end to make a decision about moving. Thank you! Andranikpasha 07:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fringe Report

Hello, Andranik. Your recent edits on "Armani" have been reported on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard by Eupator. I don't know what the page is for, I don't know why they were reported, I don't know what's going on there, but I thought you deserve a notice in case if you want to present your side. It will be useful if you are brief in your response, avoid making accusations (even if your opponents do so), and stick to specific sources, rules and policies.

I still think the view has no place on the Armenia article, since at this point it doesn't seem to be a significant view (doesn't mean it's fringe). But it's your fight, so good luck:) --TigranTheGreat 17:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Anyways I prefer this way, than to receive personal abuses here! Andranikpasha 20:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

"Dowsett surely means the geogr. Albania (sorry, the word of "Caucasian" is an obvious OR)."

Andranikpasha, that is utter hogwash. If you disrupt this debate once more by claiming Dowsett's use of "Albania" refers to the Republic of Albania, as opposed to the intended Caucasian Albania, you're going to end up blocked for disruption. I'm sure that you are completely aware of what Dowsett meant and that you are completely aware you are being disruptive, which is why you will not get another warning that stonewalling and misrepresentation of sources is unacceptable. Please contribute constructively, and only constructively, from now on. Picaroon (t) 02:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Picaroon, just look up the map to not ask about... disruption! The geographic Albania is in Caucasus, right in the place of Caucasian Albania, which was a former independent country, not a name for geographical region. And please look up again the talk: Atabek, not me (I asked I dont beleave) claims that geographic Albania is... in the Balkans... I prefer if you leave an answer! Andranikpasha 07:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikisource

Hi, in regards to this, please use Wikisource whenever a source is public domain. That article is already on Wikisource. See s:The New York Times/Nurses stuck to post. John Vandenberg (talk) 04:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the info! Andranikpasha (talk) 10:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for wikifing the Smbat Sahaziz article and Congratulations on your new barnstar and new userpage. You can place __NOTOC__ if you don't want the table of content. --VartanM (talk) 03:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much, VartanM! All the best, Andranikpasha (talk) 08:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom

Thank you for your comments. By the way, Grandmaster has mentioned your name on the Request for Arbitration page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=prev&oldid=177652910 I thought it's only fair for you to know. --TigranTheGreat (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, TigranTheGreat! Andranikpasha (talk) 18:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert parole

Per the remedies contained in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2, I'm limiting you to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, you are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. This will apply for six months, and is due to your recent edit-warring across multiple pages. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 16:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Note that the other remedies of supervised editing and civility supervision do not apply to you. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 16:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Andranik, seems like there is whole lot of backroom anti-Armenian dealings going on and its getting irritating. I'm ending our mentorship. I believe I was successful in teaching you how wikipedia works. And you are quite good at it. VartanM (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note

These edits [5] do constitute a violation of your revert parole (partial reverts still count, see Wikipedia:Three-revert rule and Help:Reverting). Since the violation is fairly stale (and anyway you'd only just been placed on revert parole), there's no point in blocking, but please refrain from such reverts in the future, and remember that partial reverts are still reverts. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 14:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! But the revert by Parishan wasnt even discussed, what about it? For a long time Im suggesting to discuss what they're going to add, not Grandmaster, nor Parishan, nor Atabek replied!

And about the link provided by you:) Can you make a comment if this note by User:Grandmaster: "I think the history of disruptive activity of Andranikpasha across various Wikimedia projects, including vandalism in English wiki, should be reviewed by the admins." here [6] is a violation of Wiki policies or not? Andranikpasha (talk) 14:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Everything you say, sooner or later will be used against you. Lar has all the tools necessary to do his job. VartanM (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Surely! Andranikpasha (talk) 22:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Nobody's out to get you. In fact I hope that you end up being a productive user and bygones are bygones. But avoiding admitting what is extremely obvious is not a good approach. I think it would be best if you made a clean break, said "yes, in the beginning of my wiki career I made some mistakes, and yes I did those disruptive things you said I did, using multiple IDs and the IPs, but now I want to change and I want people to evaluate me for what I do now, not 3 or 6 months ago". If you said that , you'd change a fair few people's minds about you, including mine. On the other hand if you stick to denying things you will have a hard time convincing people because the evidence is so blatant. Yes it's possible it wasn't you but it's highly improbable. What do you say? ++Lar: t/c 23:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Under which policies are you suggesting that. If you want to evaluate him look at his contributions. What happened before he joined the en.wiki is completely irrelevant to User:Andranikpasha. If this wasn't clear, I'm strongly urging him not to say a word, since it will be used against him, sooner or later. If not by Lar, then some other members who bothered to compile the evidence. VartanM (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

"Nobody's out to get you" this and this say otherwise. VartanM (talk) 00:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Also this is turning out to be ridiculous; Grandmasters obsession to have Andranikpasha banned from here, from the very first day Anrdranikpasha registered and contributed here remains unnoticed. The checkusers request and evidences gathered turn this episode to plain harassment, from Grandmasters part who didn’t dare to post his evidences himself. What you are requesting is beyond the authority attributed to you for something which happened elsewhere on Wikipedia months ago. Andranikpasha is contributing positively here, and no he is not vandalizing, nor anything was reported on meta. Should this suffice? Should it suffice to say that he was only recently included in the list of users with edit limitations? [7] It is funny that when Fedayee brought Ehud Lesar's case, it backslashed against him, something which was current and now. If you want to help stop possible disruption, since you are checkuser you could run a checkuser between User:Ehud Lesar and User:Elsanaturk.VartanM (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

VartanM, your comments are not helpful and if anything, are making the situation look worse for Andranikpasha, at least to me. I'm asking him the question, not you. He can answer or not as he likes. If he chooses to answer "yes, that bad stuff in the past was me" then my voice will be saying "consider what he's doing now and that he's putting the past behind him". If he chooses to answer "no, it wasn't me", or doesn't answer, then my voice will be saying "the evidence suggested that in the past he did these things and he doesn't want to come clean". That's all I am, a voice. I'm not talking about policies or anyone else, ok? Just MY perception of Andranikpasha and what positions I choose to take. Because I know what the evidence strongly suggests and no amount of bare faced denial or silence is going to change my mind. ++Lar: t/c 02:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. "Perception" - isn't that the sort of word word that tends to accompany other words, words like bigotry, stereotyping, kangaroo-courts, rough-justice, etc. I hope you will decide the "positions you choose to take" based on actual evidence, and not on something as flimsy as "perception". If all you have is a "perception", an opinion based on a feeling, then it would be much better to take no position at all. Meowy 18:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Since you are admitting that this is for you, then you can email him and ask him in private. Whether he answers yes or no here is irrelevant, either way it will be used against him, not by you, you aren’t involved in the case. So I suggest doing this privately since your request is beyond policy enforcement. I don’t know about his past contributions outside English Wikipedia, since from the beginning there were attempts by a member to have him banned, because of Andranikpasha's contributions on Shushi massacre article (some members would want it deleted, while it is clearly notable) I am attempting to stop something which will potentially be used again to harass him even further. VartanM (talk) 03:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!! Andranikpasha (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I just came by to recipricate your greetings to me, and say Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you. Meowy 18:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!! Andranikpasha (talk) 13:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

24 hours for violation of revert parole, please see [8]. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 10:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

User emailed me about an unblock, but it sure looks like a revert to me and arb restriction does apply. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Although the words were modified, I agree with the assessment that it was a revert. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 14:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello from RuWP

Heloo! Remember me? --hayk (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I dont. Why should I? Is this info about you? I prefer if you hide such info and to not "self-advertise" here! Andranikpasha (talk) 18:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi!

Thanks for your contribution! Please consider editting some of our most recently created articles. :) -- Francis Tyers · 18:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks! and pls avoid of unexplained pro-azeri editwarrings. read the Wiki rules at first.Andranikpasha (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked for violation of parole

You have been blocked for 3 days for violating your parole, as per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 for edits made to Hayasa-Azzi. The edits you reverted were not clearly vandalism and constitute a content dispute. A log of this has been made on the above page, and your parole has been extended for another 6 months. --Haemo (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Er, he was reverting an IP sock of someone who has already had his/her block extended to one month for sockpuppetry, and who has also been warned about rv'ing that article. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Who was the sock puppet, may I ask? Meowy 21:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The IP address, 144.* is a sockpuppet. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

A sockpuppet of which specific user? (Since not everyone with a 144. address is a sock-puppet - there must be thousands of ip addresses and hundreds of thousands of internet users beginning with 144!) Meowy 21:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sumerophile. The ip=Sumerophile.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 22:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't matter; unless they were banned the ArbCom ruling holds. Bad behavior by one person does not excuse the same by another — the whole point of 1RR is to prevent edit warring. It doesn't matter who started it. --Haemo (talk) 23:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Block Duration Extended (Mistake)

Your block duration has been extended to 2 weeks due to sockpuppetry.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

NonNationalistEditor is obviously not a sock of Andranikpasha, careful analysis will show they are reverting each other's edit. NonNationalistEditor is clearly User:Sumerophile, whose block has already been extended once for precisely the same thing. . Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, the article history had become quite confusing. Your block has been reduced to its original duration. I severely apologize.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

How many socks does User:Sumerophile have, and how many anonymous ip's for editing? Seems like he has just made an anonymous edit in his own talk page, saying how excellent his contributions are! Meowy 02:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)